Best Version of the Bible?

[richardeekw]

Right now I would say that the best Bible would be the best possible edition of the Douai-Rheims.

I/QUOTE]

Dear Jerry-Jet,
If the DR is the BEST Bible for you, Praise the Lord.
Publishers of other English bible translations have not gone broke - so good for them too.

Sincerely, it depends on

• you level of understanding of the English Language and
• purpose for the use of the Bible.

Yes, there are good recommendations for the DR and so also for other English Translations.

E.g. I do some daily set reflection on Scripture verses. e.g. on Mondays - the love for Material Wealth may lead to all kinds of evils…

IMt 6:24 "No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money. (NIV)

This is EASY and anyone can undand this term
Loving God… loving MONEY.

With all the emphasis on the DR, today I cut & paste and got this

No man can serve two masters. For either he will hate the one, and love the other: or he will sustain the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.

Just thinking aloud - I have some Bible knowledge and can understand MAMMON, from a Jewish context.
Although is is “richer” in meaning than just “Money” it needs some thinking and knowledge of Jewish Culture to understand better.

Imagine a seeker whose mothert-ongue is NOT English, picking up the bible to read Mammon vs Money, I think it is easier to understand the word “Money” (for the time being) in today’s ,materialistic world. - Just had a good laugh.

'I am not at all saying that you are wrong.
You are right in the context and the framework of your Needs.- your love for the Word of God and the best English translation for the Original Languages - but may not be so for others. - I know that even Biblical Scholars have their favourites or in fact they always use several English translations for some of their works.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the DR version.

God Bless.

 

[demerzel85]

The GNB is an easy read for starters, when English is not their mother-tongue.

What is the use of having the BEST English Translation of the Bible on shelf when it is not being pick-ed up to be read?.. or understand the English word-phrase used…etc.
The points you have raised are execellent for someone wanting to buy a 2nd bible translation to begin some form of “Bible study”.

The GNB is, I understand an ecumenical Bible approved for use by all Christian denominations.

Do remember that there are many Singaporeans who do not read English as their first language.- that is why some Parishes hand out free Good News /. Community Bible to RCIA enquirers. The last I know, Holy Family Church is one.

f you feel so strongly against the Good News Bible, you should spek to the Parish Prish AND the Archbishop of your concerns probably accompanied by your Spiritual Director …

There are many stages in our FAITH Development.and we cannot expect everyone to be at our level.
Peace, my friend, God Bless

It is a already a real disgrace that the most widely distributed Bible in Singapore is the Good News Bible. The GNB/TEV cannot even called an ecumenical Bible, since already many of our seperated Brethern reject the translation. There is also a problem when the main translator of the Bible (Dr Robert Bratcher) does not even believe in the inerrancy of the Bible. I have the Oxford Catholic Comparative New Testament and I have seen with my own eyes how pathetic the GNB really is.

With regards to people who speak English as a second language, well even with inclusive language the Christian Community Bible is a very much better translation. It also has very substantial Commentary to assist one in understanding scripture. I have compared the CCB with the JB and it is much closer than the GNB. In fact the CCB at times also retains some of the more traditional words found in the DRV. In terms of readability for persons with not a very good command of English I would personally recommend to CCB instead.

What is even more surprising that if in a modern translation a verse does not seem to make much sense, in the DRV the verse is really so simple.

Yes there are different stages of faith development, but this still does not detract from the matter that there needs to be solid translations of scripture. The most widely distributed Bible that Catholics used in Singapore has John 3:16 mistranslated. In Genesis, one of the verses is completely omitted because of the mention of the foreskin. For the circumsion account in the New Testament the GNB gets it wrong for the number of days.

Personally I have been asked about 1 Tim 4:14. In the GNB it reads “Do not neglect the spiritual gift that is in you, which was given to you when the prophets spoke and the elders laid hands on you.” The DRV however is VERY different “Neglect not the grace that is in thee, which was given thee by prophesy, with imposition of the hands of the priesthood.” The NAB, RSV, NRSV, JB, NJB and CCB all pale in comparison to the DRV and well have a more complicated sentence structure. The DRV is much clearer, and since it was a lady asking, the 2nd half of the verse is instantly rendered invalid.

 

[demerzel85]

IMt 6:24 "No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money. (NIV)

This is EASY and anyone can undand this term
Loving God… loving MONEY.

With all the emphasis on the DR, today I cut & paste and got this

No man can serve two masters. For either he will hate the one, and love the other: or he will sustain the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.

Just thinking aloud - I have some Bible knowledge and can understand MAMMON, from a Jewish context.
Although is is “richer” in meaning than just “Money” it needs some thinking and knowledge of Jewish Culture to understand better.

Imagine a seeker whose mothert-ongue is NOT English, picking up the bible to read Mammon vs Money, I think it is easier to understand the word “Money” (for the time being) in today’s ,materialistic world. - Just had a good laugh.

Actually the reference is not just money. From the Haydock Commentary: "Behold here a fresh motive to detach you from the love of riches, or mammon. We cannot both serve God and the world, the flesh and the spirit, justice and sin. The ultimate end of action must be one, either for this or for the next life. "

Scripture is not so that at one glance you know what the verse means and if one comes across a term or word one is not familiar with, the almost instant question is “what does it mean?” If one does not know, then one should learn.